ArticleThe journal of headache and pain2025
In patients' words: natural language processing of reports from patients experiencing orofacial pain and dysfunction.
Article in The journal of headache and pain, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence in Orofacial Pain: Diagnostic and Predictive Performance Across Machine Learning and Deep Learning Models.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProvision of value-based, patient-centered care requires careful appraisal of patients’ symptoms. Understanding subjective experiences, needs, and feelings is crucial for shared decision-making, especially when clinical findings differ from individual perceptions. Natural language processing (NLP) offers new ways to understand patients’ perspectives. This exploratory pilot study aimed to exemplify the use of three popular NLP methods to analyze open-ended textual self-reports from individuals experiencing orofacial pain and dysfunction for a more comprehensive understanding of their subjective symptom burdens.
methodsThis study used topic modeling, conceptual maps, and lexicon-based linguistic style analysis to analyze texts from 2,237 patients experiencing orofacial pain and/or dysfunction, who provided brief written descriptions of their chief complaints, functional limitations, and expectations.
resultsFrom the aggregated text corpus of 111,923 words, unsupervised topic modeling identified 10 meaningful topics by clustering words related to prevalent complaints, constraints, and co-morbidities like tinnitus and insomnia, highlighting patients’ hopes for understanding causes and receiving a clear diagnosis. Conceptual maps of the 200 most frequent words or expressions revealed occupational limitations as significant constraints and highlighted the patients’ need for understanding causes and diagnoses. Linguistic style analyses were used to enrich the map, revealing negative emotional associations with chief complaints and the patients’ struggle to reduce uncertainty and understand their illness. DISCUSSION: The results revealed distinct language patterns in open-ended orofacial pain reports. Chief complaints were associated with terms linked to anatomical locations and temporal patterns, functional limitations with impaired masticatory function, work-related activities and sleep disturbances, and expectations with an improved understanding of symptoms. Adding linguistic categories allowed for the validation of unsupervised methods and offered a nuanced approach to evaluate symptom burdens. NLP methods complement traditional information collection by capturing patients’ views, which are crucial for healthcare practice and shared decision-making within a biopsychosocial framework. When integrated into clinical workflows, NLP technologies might be a promising way of enhancing comprehensive symptom appraisal, benefiting both patients and clinicians alike.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.